Talk:Melbourne Victory FC/Archive 2

membership numbers
should there be a section showing the membership numbers of the club since inception

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/soccer/melbourne-victory-may-lose-kevin-muscat-for-six-matches/story-e6frfg8x-1225759202734

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/victory-reels-in-roos/story-e6frf9if-1111114237711 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Digmores (talk • contribs) 00:52, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Youth Sqaud
Any reason why we can't have the youth team listed. Seems to come and be deleted. Only a-league team who does not have it. --Daims09 (talk) 06:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Current squad
The templates for the A-League squads suck, the templates should be like the Ac Milan Squad and the Man Utd Squad template

So, instead of having clear templates that look good and helpingly seperate players into their positions, with small bits of information about who they are, we have small, cramped tables just because that's what the bigger, overseas clubs pages have? You must be joking; I personally thought the templates we had for the A-League teams were of very high quality. Oh well, another great thing lost because we would prefer to conform to be just like every other page out there. 58.165.54.122 (talk) 05:22, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

why isn't liejer named in the section listing players with most caps, I know he left and came back but that still puts him as second most capped player ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.45.92.239 (talk) 05:41, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Current Season Transfers
Is there any support to put this section back in? Or at least a link to where it is if it's on another page? Mikhael04 02:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Its on the current season page - Melbourne Victory season 2007-08 I think it should stay there, as it clutters up the main page too much.

--ElZilcho 07:43, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, when I posted above comment, the season page wasn't around. Season page is a nice place to put it though Mikhael04 10:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Kristan Sarkies is not a player of note
Well not yet. He hasn't done anything to make himself a player of note.

He is a current member of our Olympic team, has a couple of Socceroo caps, and scored some important goals in our championship season. If you dont have the decency to even sign your work on here, dont bother at all.

--ElZilcho 08:24, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Important goals?? What 2 goals against Perth AFTER we had already secured the premiership? Or the last goal of 6 when the Grand Final was very much secured. 3 Goals in 2 season does NOT make him notable.

And Saying he is a member of the Olympic team does not make him notable. Vince Lia is a former Olyroo captain and Championship winner. Michael Ferrante captained West Ham to the Youth FA Cup and is also a Championship winner. By your logic, both these two should also be included.

--Fritzxer 12:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Interesting point. In that case, what is the justification for having Claeys and Kitzbichler as noteables? Perhaps we need a coherant "notable" policy :)

--ElZilcho 02:57, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Claeys and Kitzbichler had had long and distinguished careers before played for Melbourne, both were internationals and both were First team players adored by the fans. But I agree that a clear criteria is needed.

--Fritzxer 12:59, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Hoggy 06:31, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Grand final winner, international representative (one of four that have represented Australia whilst playing for Melbourne, scorer in the Grand Final, etc, etc. He should be there

IMPORTANT - Adding players before their transfers are confirmed.
With the recent transfers involving Carlos Hernandez, and now Kaz Patafta, we are having problems with people getting a little bit too excited and adding players as soon as the move is bandied about in the press. I know Melbourne are pulling off some FANTASTIC signings this season, but can we try to keep a lid on it until things are official. This is the way Wiki should run - DO NOT ADD players until their transfer is confirmed by the club. Please :)

--ElZilcho 01:52, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed - althought I have added Patafta as he has offically been signed now: http://www.melbournevictory.com.au/default.aspx?s=mvfc_playerprofile_item&pid=1335 but yes, I do agree, don't add any players until the Victory makes a statement confirming the signing. Mikhael04 07:39, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Carlos Hernández
I know at the moment it's only a rumour, but remember, we removed Fred before he officially left, so I'm seeing some double standards here seeing that the Carlos Hernández rumour has been mentioned in the Age, multiple South American newspapers, and Tony Irving refused to deny it.

So, although it's fine not having him up there as he's not officially signed, I'm just a bit confused to the official policy. Mikhael04 07:13, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Hernández has signed a loan deal with the Victory now for 2 years, but "yet to be confirmed by either clubs"? Mr Poodles said it perfectly "You know what Australian football controlled by FFA sites are like, always late in releasing news." So, can the person doing the editing reply here so we can have a conversation about what to do? I personally don't feel like an editing war. I'm open to change, but the only thing that's missing for Carlos is a report from the teams. 124.180.97.37 04:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Until the transfer is confirmed by the clubs, his transfer should not be added to this page. Players have often been known to claim one thing, only for the other to happen. Alot goes on behind the scenes in a transfer that even the play involved is not privy to. Wikipedia should be based on FACTUAL information, not the word of a player hoping for a move. If you are going to argue a position, at least have the decency to register as a Wiki user. ElZilcho 12:10, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I have, I just forgot to sign in, sorry. Thank you for clearing that up, it's just if you look down this page a bit I was in a situation before where I was told the opposite. I won't put Carlos in until he's officially signed (although I apologise if anyone else does). Mikhael04 02:45, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Finally confirmed by the club. Now we can all be friends again :D ElZilcho 04:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Blocking Changes
Can some request the page doesn't get updated by new or unregistered users... the page got raped last night —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Daims09 (talk • contribs) 11:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

hey i have just re edited the page to get rid of the stupid and rude comments added onto it.this is my first action on wikipedia and im proud to clean up this page for my club. Its really quite sad that some people would write that kind of shit on the page i mean its just stupid. this site was made to share information and stuff not for people to be dicks and call people like ernie merrick "penis lovers." i hope this doesnt happen again but i guess it will which is really sad. i agree with the above comment of no new users update the page, even if it means i cant update it.--Nerv2004 13:25, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Change to Sqaud Page
Ive made, some adjustments to the sqaud page... some one had listed almost every former players as a 'notable' player.. which is b/s so instead i restarted the list of Victory players page... which I have added with all the players so it should be update to date. You can find it under the notable players.

I have also changed the train on sqaud to have only current train on players... and also added them to the Melbourne Victory Players thread with a * to show them as train on players only. Otherwise we could list stacks of players moving forward... best only to keep current players.

Edit; 16/04/07 some one will need to add the train on sqaud again... with the vanderlism last night.. not sure who was what or who

Indivdual Honours
Ive removed all the media awards... stick to offical a-league awards.. otherwise you could add 50 media related awards... So I say stick to the offical ones. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Daims09 (talk • contribs) 05:06, 14 April 2007 (UTC).

Terrace 27
Terrace 27 is a small yet influencial group on the terrace at all MVFC matches. It exists I assure you. No need to remove it - it is as an important crew as frontline and OSS. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.239.146.52 (talk) 10:49, 22 February 2007 (UTC).
 * I read that, not as "Terrace 27 should be included", but rather "OSS and Frontline should be deleted" .. -- Chuq 02:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Can people stop deleting Terrace 27 as a supporter group? Its an insult. —Preceding unsigned comment added by User: (talk • contribs)
 * Inclusion or non-inclusion isn't supposed to be taken personally. -- Chuq 02:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Removed T-27 as this group has dis-banded.

--Fritzxer 1:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

New signing confirmed
http://www.melbournevictory.com.au/default.aspx?s=newsdisplay&id=7129&pageid=71

http://www.melbournevictory.com.au/default.aspx?s=playerprofile&pid=308

No player number yet. The Frederick 03:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Melbourne has pinched Abel Xavier from LA Galaxy at the last moment: http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,21745664-5000940,00.html "Victory also announced yesterday it had signed former Portuguese international and Middlesbrough defender Abel Xavier"

Where else is it reported? Not here, Newsnow.co.uk football transfers - keyword xavier

Added club song
I think it's an important aspect of the club. I've confirmed with MVFC the lyrics are correct. Bernard.herrok 03:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Club Honours
I believe we should only list the awards the club has won, otherwise, the list could easily end up with ridiculous "honours". An example to note is the Preston Lions FC article; the club have only won a Docherty Cup, a few VPL titles and the occasional VIC Divisional premiership, but list every "Runner-Up" appearance as a legitimate Honour. Dragases 06:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Season 06/07
Could we possibly integrate this with the history section? Mr. Poodles 05:39, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

07/08 Kit
Does anyone have any references for the new 07/08 Victory kit? I can't find anything anywhere. It should be removed unless some references are out there.

-- Tony Ising has mentioned it on the main fan board, mentioning that the discussions with Reebok are complete for a new home kit, been common knowledge for awhile that we're adopting a new one. Also with the away kit changing while the poll on the official site, it's very easy to guess that the current one displayed is it. Wait a few months I say, until at least the start of the new season before it's edited. Mr. Poodles 05:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


 * They've released the new kit designs. I've changed the images accordingly. The Frederick 14:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Fred
Has anyone got any real confirmation of Fred moving to DC United? All I hear is that it's "nearly signed", I haven't actually heard anything from the Victory, DC United or even Fred himself. Anyone got any real proof or is it just a major rumour right now?--Mikhael04 00:08, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

It has happened, DC United have confirmed it and so has Fred's agent. You know what Australian football controlled by FFA sites are like, always late in releasing news. International friendlys are always known months before they are announced, same with transfers. Mr. Poodles 04:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Notable Former Players
Is Claudinho really a 'notable' former player? He really didn't make much of an impact and had barely any game time during the 06/07 season.

Yeh, I removed it, notable former player my arse. Mr. Poodles 09:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Someone added Sarkies as a notable former player. I'm changing, it, 'cause he really isn't famous, and really didn't do anything. The Frederick 10:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree, leave Sarkies off the list for the moment. Maybe in the future if he represents Australia at senior national level he can be added. Raph89 04:21, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Sarkies was added again, I'm gonna take him out again. If someone wants to discuss it, they're free to do so here. The Frederick 07:25, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Unregistered Users
This article cops a lot of vandalism, I was thinking that newly registered users and non-users should be prevented from editing the article. Mr. Poodles 09:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Membership numbers per season
Is it possible to include a membership section and the average home crowd attendances. As done on the AFL club sites. I understand the Victory's membership for season 05-06 was aprox 6,500 and 06-07 was 11,000.

Cheers Al. 203.214.41.97 01:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Ernie Merrick's nationality
Isn't Ernie Merrick an Australian citizen? If so, why does he still have a Scottish flag next to his name? S3tTz 07:47, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Because he is scottish, but he can switch to Aus. nationality tomorrow if he wanted too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crelache (talk • contribs) 05:31, 9 June 2013 (UTC)


 * If he is truly a UK citizen, he cannot simply "switch to Aus. nationality tomorrow if he wanted too". HiLo48 (talk) 07:30, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Kevin Muscat's position
Perhap's he should be put under "Defenders" as opposed to "Midfielders" in the "Current Squad" section, since he has played as a defender for Melbourne during all of last season. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.63.37.182 (talk) 23:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Article too large
I suggest moving their seasons to a page of their own and providing links. Maybe get rid of excess info or give them pages of their own. It's too long and frustrating for people with slower speed internets 60.224.2.159 (talk) 23:45, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I can sympathise with you there, unfortunately people with better connections seem to forget that this can be a problem. I would recommend that the season content be summarised in the main article and have its full length in an article called Melbourne Victory FC seasons, and we can work on from there. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 19:48, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

The City Derby
There's this article called The City Derby, can anyone please help with the information by going to this hyperlink? The City Derby. Thanks.

Grant Brebner
Grant Brebner has changed his citizenship to Australian, so he no longer counts as a foriegn player. Please do not change his nationality to Scottish.
 * I reverted your edit because I couldn't find a source for this - as I explained in my edit summary. Do you have a source proving he has Australian citizenship now? -- timsdad  (talk) 09:30, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes there is proof Brebner is Australian here - http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25207419-2883,00.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.168.200.140 (talk) 09:33, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe it says "Scottish midfielder Grant Brebner recently received Australian residency, meaning he is no longer counted in the A-League's increased quota of five overseas players". This means he has become an Australian resident, but he is not a citizen. It is true that he is no longer counted as an overseas player as he resides (lives) in Australia. Yet he has not got Australian citizenship and is therefore still Scottish. -- timsdad  (talk) 09:39, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * This is true, my girlfriend has Australian residency but is a Canadian citizen and it will be a couple more years before she is eligible to pursue Australian citizenship. She works and pays tax here, but there is no question that she is Canadian. If Grant Brebner has residency but not citizenship, he should continue to be listed as having Scottish nationality. Camw (talk) 08:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you agree. -- timsdad  (talk) 08:22, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Kits
Do we really need to have a representation of every kit in the history of the club? Although nice to have a few, there it little reason to have all of them on the main page. It makes it clunky, lengthy and unappealing. I reference to feature articles such as Central Coast Mariners and Chelsea where this does not happen, maybe the 'V' home kit in 2007/2008 to illustrate the connection to Victoria. CDSinclair (talk) 06:36, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree. It should probably be just the inaugural kit and the current kits. The Frederick (talk) 07:25, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you serious??? Every kit the club has worn, except guests i.e. the seatbelt jumper must be noted, how silly of you all — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crelache (talk • contribs) 07:46, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Rivalry
The entire section on rivalry needs to be re-writen due to the inclusion of the Heart. Most, noticably, you cannot now call Adelaide their geographic rival. TheTribeHasSpoken (talk) 02:12, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Treble
Why is this there? Surely a pre-season tournament cannot be included in a treble. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.38.227.33 (talk) 12:33, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Full name
The club is officially registered with ASIC as "MELBOURNE VICTORY F.C PTY. LTD." so technically the article should include Melbourne Victory F.C as its full name... Hack (talk) 03:29, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Why are Geoff Kellaway and Julius Davies listed under "notable former players?
? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heyguysimjakob (talk • contribs) 05:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Because they're notable. Julius was a spinal player for the youth team, and Kelloway assisted in many goals for the 2010-11 season. Geoff was also a star in they youth team. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crelache (talk • contribs) 07:44, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Football Club
A few links to sources labeling this club 'Melbourne Victory Football Club' - as it is commonly known. Note the certificied twitter account of the club, who refer to themself as Melbourne Victory Football Club, in their own blurb.

- https://twitter.com/gomvfc - http://www.responsiblegambling.vic.gov.au/what-we-do/community-education-and-awareness/our-partners/melbourne-victory - http://www.truelocal.com.au/business/melbourne-victory-football-club/melbourne - http://www.whitepages.com.au/business-listing/melbourne-victory-football-club-1012644/melbourne-vic

Lets not forget, this article is about a football club - the registered parent company name (whether it be for business-registration ABC/ACN, tax or any other purpose) is irrelevant in the case of an article about a sports team, unless the section of the article is specifically refering to this component of their business. If the team were registered as 'John Smith PTY LTD' for ABN/ACN purposes the team would still be commonly known as Melbourne Victory Football Club and is therefore apropriate to to use this name in the article.203.13.128.104 (talk) 06:13, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


 * So why is it (and most of the other A League clubs) explicitly listed as "....FC" in formal documentation? HiLo48 (talk) 06:17, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Because FC is an acronym for Football club, shorthand. If the "FC' on the end of the club's name as you see it does not stand for 'Football Club', what does it stand for? Refer to Manchester United F.C. - same scenario. Manchester United FC as short hand for Manchester United Football Club. You said yourself HiLo, wikipedia uses "Common Name" - remember we're talking about a football club - not a company, despite the club obviously having a company behind it. The purpose of the article is the team, not the company.203.13.128.104 (talk) 06:46, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No, it's not an acronym. It might be an abbreviation. But if the club really was so determined to be known as "Melbourne Victory Football Club", why didn't it register that name? HiLo48 (talk) 07:05, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


 * The legal name of the club is Melbourne Victory F.C Pty Ltd and the most common usages are either Melbourne Victory FC or Melbourne Victory. Melbourne Victory Football Club is a minority usage and is unofficial. If they wanted to be known by the long form, they should have registered it legally. As it happens, it's roughly 50/50 in terms of actually spelling out FC (PG, BR, SFC, AU are registered as Football Clubs, while CCM, NUJ, MH and WSW are FCs). Hack (talk) 06:51, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * @203.13.128.104 Manchester United are registered with Companies House in the UK as Manchester United Football Club Limited. This is not the same situation. Hack (talk) 06:56, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Melbourne Victory Football Club" is really not a very common name at all. I'd suggest that simply "Victory" might be the most common name. HiLo48 (talk) 06:59, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

International players
I have inserted a new section between Notable players and personnel, who played for their country whilst at this club — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crelache (talk • contribs) 07:43, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Article Length-Potential Deletion of season data
Hi everyone,

as you may know, the article is getting pretty big, as it as already large already.

What I believe we should do is, just have the inaugural season data in season history. Then under that, a table of links to every separate season.

What do you all think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crelache (talk • contribs) 22:49, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Players With multiple nationalities
It has come to my attention that editors do not seem to understand what it means to have multiple nationalities. It is when a player can represent more than one country, being his choice. The main flag is the country he has chosen to play for. The second flag is a country that he can represent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crelache (talk • contribs) 13:41, 26 June 2013 (UTC)


 * If regular editors struggle to understand it, how do you reckon our less well informed readers will cope? HiLo48 (talk) 04:57, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Melbourne Victory logo
The current logo is incorrect. The new logo has changed (a couple of years ago). You can notice the difference in the two logos by comparing the size of the 'Melbourne' text with the one on the club's homepage. Is anyone able to change it?

I have uploaded the correct file to: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Melbourne_Victory_FC_Official_Logo.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psr008800 (talk • contribs) 04:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Removal of Notable Players Section
I have removed the notable players section because inclusion criteria given were so vague as to be useless, essentially saying, here are some criteria, but there are players in cluded who do not meet them for other undefined reasons. Such lists of players, by definition need to have very clear inclusion criteria, otherwise they are, like the list removed, inherently OR. Additionally given that there are already sections outlining the players with the most appearances and the most goals, a second section on generally notable players makes no real sense, as they are, by definition not as notable as players listed in other sections (not to mention the whole WP:NOT thing that this article borders very close to) it just seems entirely unnecessary. Fenix down (talk) 16:06, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * How about 100 games or being a permanent captain as criteria? Hack (talk) 03:58, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think appearances should be used as a criterion as there is already a listing for most appearances, anything else is just duplication. I don't thnk there is also any need for a list of captains. If a captain did something notable during his time at the club it would be preferable that this should be noted in sourced prose. To be honest, as I said above, as there is already a table for top appearances and top goalscorers, there is no need for a separate list of notable players. Fenix down (talk) 10:47, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm making it's own article, and it's link will be on the main page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crelache (talk • contribs) 23:20, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * How about you actually JOIN this discussion first? It will help to gain some sort of agreement on what makes a notable player. And please put a link here on the Talk page to your article when you start it. I'm sure other will be interested in it. HiLo48 (talk) 05:48, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The page is Melbourne Victory Notable Players. I struggle to see how a player who has played two matches (Davies), nine matches (Kellaway) or 24 matches (Flores) is especially notable. Hack (talk) 06:21, 2 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks Hack. Yes, that page is rubbish, again demonstrating that many of our worst articles are those created about soccer clubs and players by their fans. Sad. HiLo48 (talk) 06:45, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you are quite right HiLo, that article and List of international Melbourne Victory players are nothing but WP:CRUFT, WP:OR and contravene WP:NOT. As such I have proposed them for deletion. Fenix down (talk) 13:25, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

The Treble
Is this really considered a 'treble'. It's a pre-season tournament. The name "pre-season" should indicate how much weight was put into this competition. If it's not part of the season, then it can't really be considered part of a 'treble' can it? I also couldn't find much of any references of note that give them credit for a treble. Surely the Treble in Australia would be considered the A-League Premiership, the A-League Grand Final Championship and the Asian Champions League. And then once the Football Federation Australia Cup, a combination of the Premiership, Grand Final, the FFA Cup and the Asian Champions League (The first three being a domestic treble, and one including the ACL being a 'true' Treble. Macktheknifeau (talk) 06:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
 * It's still three trophies in a season. You're making a judgment on whether it's a legitimate treble. That's not the role of Wikipedia - that's up to the reliable sources. Hack (talk) 03:06, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Supporter issues - it's time to discuss
I have now twice reverted separate attempts to add content about current issues the club is having with its supporter groups. I did this partly because of the sourcing (Facebook, which is unacceptable), and partly because I'm not convinced it belongs in the long term, main article about the club. I know it must feel important to members of those groups, who are almost certainly behind these edits, but it look like recentism to me. I'd like to hear the views of others who are not part of the dispute. HiLo48 (talk) 03:13, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok fair enough if you dont think this issue belongs in the long term issues, but would this not mean getting rid of the rest of the section too? Which was also a 'minor issue' in the short term history of the club. If the information already there is relevant, then surely the current issues are too?


 * edit: Additionally, why is facebook unacceptable? the citations i provided where relevant to the article and where i souced the information from.Olidaman (talk) 3:20, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * [We had an edit conflict] Part of the issue is the sourcing. Wikipedia requires quality, reliable sources for content. Mainstream newspapers, as used for that earlier content, are fine. Facebook isn't, because anyone can write anything on Facebook. Also, I think that police concerns about criminal and anti-social behaviour are bigger than the current squabbles. But if you can find better sources, maybe it's worth a look. HiLo48 (talk) 07:19, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I see where you are coming from with that. But if you actually took the time to research the issue and have a look at the two facebook pages i provided then you would see they are definantly both reliable sources for the current issue. If you dont know, the pages i posted where the official NTC (North Terrace Collective) page and the BWB (Blue & White Brigade) page. Both of these are reliable souces of information. Arguably, if we only allow to cite major newspapers; wikipedia will be influenced by the views of major coorparations. (talk) 7:23, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * To some extent I agree with you. In fact, I recall when I was a beginner and had a Facebook link rejected. The problem is that there is little to stop me going to those Facebook pages right now and deleting or corrupting that content. The Club's website would be OK, if there's anything useful there. HiLo48 (talk) 07:38, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, it is either cite a reliable source on facebook or cite my own brain. I would think that Citing a legitiment facebook page would be acceptable but obviously not. I know you are trying to protect the page, and that is great, but i do think that the edits that anonymous and myself published are worthy of being in the section. I appreciate your feedback and help but i do not appreciate you twice reverting these additions to the page. Olidaman (talk) 07:46, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Use of Facebook as a citation may be appropriate only in the very specific situation that it is quoting what a person or a group has said and the account can be verified as legimate. Coverage by a reliable source would be preferred. If the information has not been covered in a reliable source, the question should be whether it needs to be included. Hack (talk) 03:36, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Remove Players With Multiple Nationalities section
Is the Players With Multiple Nationalities section necessary? Can it be removed? I don't see what relevance it has to the club and in some cases to the players. In addition the section is not sourced. And who decided that deleting the section "will be tagged as VANDALISM"? Also, the section has reference to WikiProject_Football/Clubs, though I can't find anything related on that page.--2nyte (talk) 14:33, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Support section
The current section needs some rewriting through due to the recent waring I thought I should bring it up here first. I think we should remove most of the information currently in the section, rewriting it so it describes the main supporter group, that they have some prominence within the A-League and that that fan behaviour has been brought up in the media. I don't think we should be adding specific incidents or suspected incidents or much of what is currently there, which is mostly sensationalised by the media.--2nyte (talk) 09:55, 14 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I agree that what's there now isn't great. Obviously "hooligan" doesn't belong. (Obsessed fans ARE a problem, aren't they?) But the problem with your proposal is that "the media" is supposed to be our provider of reliable sourcing. Which bits of "the media" are you ruling out? What other sources would you have in mind? HiLo48 (talk) 10:50, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Changes from "Socceroos" to "Australia national association football team"
In this and several other articles Macktheknifeau has unilaterally changed the word "Socceroos" to "Australia national association football team". (Sometimes with the word "player" tacked on for sanity, but hardly for clarity and simplicity.) I see these changes as pointy, confrontational, and not in line with the agreed naming of Soccer in Australia There is a centralised discussion on this matter underway at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Football in Australia). HiLo48 (talk) 22:36, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

someone please ban User:Dragonpulse
User:Dragonpulse just vandalises the page, can we please block him??? I don't know how too but he is just doing annoying shit that really needs to be stopped